Ontario government NOT being…

Ontario government NOT being "short-sighted" as claimed by FNU. NFU argues against Bill 97, Proposed Provincial Planning Statement. They argue that this Bill will:
"Fragment and permanently remove farmland from protected agricultural use" - Yes, it will remove the farmland from protected agricultural use however, I would disagree in many cases it wouldl maintain the majority of the land as agricultural. Regarding the land being fragmented, we own farmland which has been in our family for generations. We rent to a local farmer as the last generation of family members that live on the land do not farm. We are finding that due to the changes in agricultural technology, the machines are having difficulty getting to some of our road front land therefore already "fragmenting" the farming. A severed lot in this area would provide for the next generation to grow up on the land and still preserve the majority of agricultural land for farming. Strategically placing the severed lots would reduce and even eliminate the fragmenting.
"Limit farm business growth" - this would depend on the area. In Southern Ontario, there are more people that own farmland than farm. The initial and ongoing cost of farming is very expensive, that is why many farmers need to rent land and equipment. Farmers would be unable to purchase the farmland and homes. Allowing the land to be severed, ensures the land will be rented out and maintained as farmland for generations to come.
"Inflating farmland prices" - that is Ontario. No land is cheap. The farmland will always remain inflated and most farmers would likely be unable to purchase it. Buy not allowing land to be severed, the NFU is actually pushing farmland owners to sell to developers. Children cannot afford to buy the land and home off their parents but if land is severed they could build and maintain the land that they have appreciated for years. Most farmland in our area is being bought by people that do not live in the area and do not care about the area or it is being sold to developers. No choice when you can't sever the land.
"Creating conflict with non-farmers in residential areas..." When land on an individual's farm is to be severed, it does not become a residential area. Only when the land owner has no choice but to sell to developers does this happen.
"Significant burden to municipal and provincial services" Again, if landowners can sever their farmland, it does not become residential. Services are paid for by the landowner as most are on a cistern and septic system. As well, there are no sidewalks or fire hydrants that would need to be maintained or installed.
Individuals living on farmland want to keep it that way. That is why they live there and want to let the next generation enjoy the beautiful land. If unable to sever the land, Ontario will be losing not only agricultural land to developers but also a valuable resource of the next generation moving from the area and out of the province. There are many financial incentives that are being introduced by other provinces to move there and the cost of living is less expensive. Now that people can work virtually, they can still work for a company in a specific city within Ontario but are no longer required to live there. As a result, less money is being spent on taxes, food, and everyday living expenses. Families with "roots" in certain areas will no longer exist.